The dreaded 'f' word is back but coaches swear their players are no flops

April 12 2002

Rugby league has always been a sport in which one tit will get you two tats. We are not referring to body parts and bodily illustrations here. We are talking retaliation, writes Roy Masters.

Rugby league has always been a sport in which one tit will get you two tats. We are not referring to body parts and bodily illustrations here. We are talking retaliation.

The code has been almost biblical in its observance of the dictum: "Do unto others as they do unto you ... only worse."

This is why league officials fear the imminent return of the dreaded four-letter "f" word: flop.

The prospect of tonnes of oink lying on top of the man with the ball, a thick forest of pawing arms, terrifies administrators. Flopping is on the way back as a retaliatory strike against the recent trend of players not touching the ball with their foot in the process of playing it.

As Wests Tigers coach Terry Lamb says: "You've got no choice but to flop on the man playing the ball if referees are going to let players roll the ball between their legs. You've got to slow the play-the-ball down somehow." ");document.write("

advertisement

");
}
}
// -->

Referees' coach Peter Louis admits he is concerned at the return of the flop, saying he has instructed his whistleblowers to reconsider their tolerance for an incorrect play-the-ball.

"Some players are not putting their foot on the ball," he said. "It's slightly worse this year compared to last year. There have been a couple of flops let go so far this season because the referee could smell a try at the time. But we will not tolerate flops."

Coaches nominate the Bulldogs, Brisbane and Parramatta as teams most prone to get bodies tangled in tackles and agree the Sharks' Jason Stevens is the code's arch flopper. Stevens, a god-fearing man, justifies his flopping in terms of the "do unto others" commandment.

"Brisbane's Andrew Gee has a technique of hitting the tackler with his arm as a buffer and then dropping immediately on his knees to the ground [the old bumper bar tackle]," Stevens says. "You can never get him on his back and he can always get a quick play-the-ball. Therefore, it's important to flop on him legally. The aim is to get as many bodies on the player as possible."

Notice Jason uses the word, "legally". When it comes to illegal play-the-balls and flopping, coaches insist their own players are choirboys compared with the offenders at other clubs.

A forsythia could bloom faster than some tackles; a player can hold the ball-carrier longer than he does his wife at night, yet the coach will insist the illegality is with the other team.

Still, all agree Canterbury's prop of the 80s, Peter Tunks, was the code's No1 flopper.

"He was the flop king," says Stevens, who was a teenager when Tunks played. "He had such a massive frame."

Tunks attacked rucks with all the subtlety of a bull elephant in the mating season, lying on top of players well after the tackle had been made. Newcastle coach Michael Hagan played with Tunks and says: "He was a man who could flop. He'd make four tackles a game and 18 flops and get credited on the stats sheet for every one."

Newcastle play the ball quickly - a reasonable strategy for a team led by the fast-thinking Andrew Johns.

The Sharks have adopted new coach Chris Anderson's flat attack, which demands a fast play-the-ball because the defence is closer this year. The defensive line has shrunk to 8m because referees have been instructed to mark the 10m corridor from the point where the tackle is made, rather than where the man plays the ball.

Louis says: "In the first two rounds, referees and touch judges were concentrating on getting the revised 10m rule right and their focus went away from the ruck. They have now been told if the play the ball is bad, it should result in a penalty against the attacking team."

Parramatta also have a quick play-the-ball, consistent with coach Brian Smith's tactic of moving the ball wide early in the tackle count. While no coach has accused the Eels of not touching the ball with their feet, Lamb believes they are the best floppers.

"They are very good at it," he says. "They flop on the tackler, not the bloke playing the ball. They do it from No1 to 17, not just a couple of them. It doesn't look like a flop because they jump on their teammate, hold him a bit and then [go through a charade] of pulling him away."

Anxious to attract a sympathetic whistle, Lamb says: "If any of my blokes at training don't touch the ball with their foot, I penalise them by making them do a few push-ups on the spot."

Canberra coach Matthew Elliott points out there are alternatives to flopping, saying: "The tackler can put his hand on the ball or hold the player's foot, or not put him straight on the ground. They can waltz around with the ball-carrier, keeping him on his feet while waiting for the defence to get ready.

"There is always the risk of an unload, which is particularly dangerous when the defensive line is retreating."

The practice of releasing the ball when held in a tackle is called "a flop back". League terminology has always been confusing.

League has always been a game in which things are rarely straightforward, always a little bit screwed, where collisions are embraced, where hitting is a form of chatting.

It has always been counter-evolutionary: the further the season progresses, the less important the skilful player becomes as the grisly defence finds ways of retarding his progress.

It's up to Louis and his men to ensure the promising 2002 season doesn't become like Roman traffic; no rules, just recommendations.

As Lamb says: "You'll hear on the audio tape of games referees warning players, 'Play the ball with your feet'. How about penalising them?"